This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Water footprint article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on 21/08/08. The result of the discussion was Merge.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Water This article is within the scope of WikiProject Water, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Water supply-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WaterWikipedia:WikiProject WaterTemplate:WikiProject WaterWater articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Food and drink This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Food and Drink task list: history watch purge To edit this page, select here Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this. Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here. Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages. Environment This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Politics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Economics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2014 Q1. Further details were available on the "Education Program:University of Toronto Mississauga/CCT110: The Rhetoric of Digital and Interactive Media Environments (W14)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2019 and 11 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Coycca Gonzales, Fawizzle, Camille Ponzu. Peer reviewers: Anonymous Lotus.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC) reply

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2020 and 22 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Geoffrey Luoma. Peer reviewers: Kayleemessina, S.tahl93, Guillermodominguezjr.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC) reply

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2021 and 20 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mtorre2vu.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC) reply

I do agree that water use is somewhat overlapped with different water consumption related articles. However, the main point of this article is water footprint. I rearranged the content, as well as added case studies here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hochingli ( talk • contribs) 01:49, 10 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Water use by country is an important topic area that should be covered by this article. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 21:15, 14 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I've only come to this article to stub-sort it, from Category:Stubs, but had a look at the Afd and explored further. It looks to me as if Water consumption, which currently redirects to Drinking water should perhaps redirect to something more general, as I'd think that "Water consumption" includes industrial and agricultural uses as well as human consumption. And Water efficiency, which wasn't mentioned in the AfD, seems to overlap too. Perhaps Water needs a project, and a sidebox with links to related articles - it's such a key topic for human survival on the planet, such a key aspect of majority world poverty, and such a likely cause of international conflict too. PamD ( talk) 15:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I moved the following reference from external links to here in case someone wants to incorporate it into the article.

Nature article (August 2012), Water balance of global aquifers revealed by groundwater footprint, http://www.hydrology.nl/mainnews/1-latest-news/365-water-balance-of-global-aquifers-revealed-by-groundwater-footprint.html. Joja lozzo 19:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC) reply

You can also include in the definition of water this in: Human uses - Agriculture . May be important to understand how to regulate climate and to add this on de water cycle.

From France Wikipédia translation: Section use on agricole sector :

"Agroforestry and hedgerow are both solutions to build micro-climates and allow the circulation of water go all the way inland thanks to the phenomena of evapotranspiration of plants. For example, one hectare of beech forest, which consumes 2,000 to 5,000 tonnes of water per year, yields 2,000 tonnes per evaporation."

Sources: ONF, https://www.onf.fr/onf/forets-et-espaces-naturels/+/1f::comprendre-la-foret.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.23.199.52 ( talk) 11:17, 12 January 2020 (UTC) reply

The notion that “Water use is basically water footprint” (suggested above), seems to be responsible for many of the problems in this article. One would like to see a much less narrow perspective in an article with the title “Water use”. With its almost exclusive focus on water footprints, the article wholly ignores important non-consumptive uses of water and ignores several important measures of water use. There is no mention of environmental use of water. (As an example of its quantitative importance, environmental use accounts for about 48 percent of California’s dedicated water use in an “average” water year.) The article ignores most sectoral allocations of water, although the article’s introduction does make an egregiously erroneous claim about agricultural water use in addition to an ambiguous claim. (The latter states ‘From 1900 to 2000, water use for agriculture went from about 500 to 2,500 cubic kilometers per year,’ but we are not told whether this refers only to withdrawn water use, or whether it also includes “green water” use. Schafhirt ( talk) 18:54, 18 June 2015 (UTC) reply

The article’s claim that agriculture uses 70 percent of water resources is an extreme error. The source cited is a newspaper article, not an authoritative source on water use. Agriculture accounts for nearly 70 percent of global withdrawn water use, but this is far less than 70 percent of water resources. In fact, agricultural use of withdrawn water is about 6 percent of global renewable freshwater resources annually, and about 4 percent of the precipitation falling on land is used in rainfed agriculture. These figures are supported by global data compiled by the FAO’s AQUASTAT. A table of figures in the article is preceded by a statement attributing the figures to “Research by the Cranfield University” in the UK. However, two of those figures clearly came from Australian research. (See: Ridoutt and Pfister. 2010. Global Environmental Change 20: 113-120). Rather than citing an authoritative publication presenting such figures, the Wikipedia article simply cited a news media publication, using a now-dead link. Unless some editor can check all the figures, cite a credible source for them, and write an accurate comment about them, the statement and the data should be deleted. In that case, the data could be replaced by figures from the WFN. The article claims that “The water footprint of a product is the total volume of freshwater used to produce the product.” Applied to agricultural products, this claim tends to mislead readers, because it does not acknowledge that in many cases, the footprint is the volume of water use associated with production of the product, rather than the water use that would be assignable to production of the product. Schafhirt ( talk) 18:58, 18 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Another claim is: "An individual’s daily diet of fruits, vegetables and grains requires more than 1,500 litres (396.3 US gal) of water, as compared to 3,400 litres (898.2 US gal) needed for a daily diet rich in animal protein.[21]" This comes from a newspaper source, but the link given no longer provides access to the article. Thus one cannot determine whether the figures originated from an authoritative source, and if so, what that source was. As the same article was cited for an extremely erroneous claim regarding agricultural water use, the cited source cannot be considered reliable. Moreover, there is no explicit indication of what the figures mean. (Are they based on water footprints, or on some other measure of water use?) For these reasons, the claim should be deleted. It might be restored if appropriately described, verified and accompanied by a better citation, or alternatively, it could be replaced by data from another source. Schafhirt ( talk) 21:22, 18 June 2015 (UTC) reply

The article claims, “The more food comes from irrigated land, the larger is the water footprint.[11]“ The claim uses a spurious reference citation. Nothing in the cited reference supports the claim, and the character string “irrig” does not even appear there. WUE (water use efficiency) is a measure of crop production per unit amount of water used by evapotranspiration where a crop is grown. Examination of research literature from numerous regions in the world shows that WUE is often higher where irrigation is used. In some environments, irrigation may confer no benefit if done at some stages of crop growth, but failure to irrigate at all during crucial stages can result in greatly reduced yield, resulting in reduced WUE (Kadayifci et al. 2005. Agric. Water Mgt. 72: 59-68.) Irrigation, in some cases as “full” irrigation, and in other cases as “deficit” irrigation, has often been shown to result in increased WUE (Anwar et al. 2003. J. Agric. Sci. 141: 285-301; Yazar et al. 2002. Irrig. Drain. 51: 293-300; Chaves et al. 2007. Ann. Appl. Biol. 150: 237-252; Tavakkoli and Oweis. 2004. Agric. Water Mgt. 65:225-236; Sakellariou-Makrantonaki et al. 2007. Agric. Water Mgt. 90: 180-189 ). Because the Wikipedia claim uses a spurious citation and is inconsistent with results of several studies, it should be deleted. Schafhirt ( talk) 23:48, 19 June 2015 (UTC) reply

A more precise title for this article should be "Water footprint". The term "water use" is a generic term and it has multiple meanings depending on whether it is used in hydrologic, engineering or regulatory contexts. "Water use" could mean total water withdrawals from different supply sources, water withdrawn or diverted and put to beneficial use, finished drinking water produced by water providers (utilities), water sold to customers through metered connections, and many other meanings. In the professional literature the phrase “water use” is often used as a generic term with the its meaning defined by the context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DziegielewskiBA ( talk • contribs) 15:45, 9 March 2017 (UTC) reply

I agree with everything stated in the previous comment. For several reasons it is better to rename this article Water footprint. If anybody is inclined to structure the fuzzy concept of "water use" into a separate article, by all means do it. But that would be a very different article altogether, of an almost philosophical nature, for all the reasons given above. The well-documented and clearly definable concept "water footprint", however, warrants extensive coverage on any Wikipedia, especially the English language one. The thought of people all over the world, trying to find out what "water footprint" means, being redirected to a page called water use on English Wikipedia, is embarrassing. -- Sampa ( talk) 23:49, 26 January 2018 (UTC) reply

I agree, so let's do it! Who can remember how to rename a page? I think it's the "move" template that needs to be used. Ping Sampa EMsmile ( talk) 14:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Thank you! EMsmile ( talk) 16:23, 24 February 2018 (UTC) reply

If someone has time, please adjust all the section headings as we don't need to repeat the title of the article ("water footprint") in all those section headings! Also I suggest we use more standard headings, such as "Background, History" etc. see e.g. here. EMsmile ( talk) 16:23, 24 February 2018 (UTC) reply

There is a section seems important because Europe is a continent that uses lots of water. However, there the EU does not include all countires in Europe. Additionally, although the US is not a continent is still uses a lot of water for their industries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coycca Gonzales ( talk • contribs) 17:04, 13 November 2019 (UTC) reply

There should be a section with the countries that use more water and what are the industries of those countries where water is mostly used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coycca Gonzales ( talk • contribs) 17:06, 13 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Water footprint of products briefly mentions the variation in water usage by country/diet, but does not go into depth about the nuances related to each food product. Fawizzle ( talk) 17:27, 13 November 2019 (UTC) reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• World Water Footprint.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 00:24, 14 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Section "Calculation for different actors" writes: "The virtual water balance of an area is the net import of virtual water Vi, net, defined as the difference of the gross import Vi of virtual water from its gross export Ve." This "difference" parallels the idea of change in storage of water balance, and not water balance. Let us remember that change in storage is defined as the difference between inflow (import) and outflow (export).

So, using a very well-known hydrological law, i.e., water balance, in such a phrase is misleading and I think wrong. Additionally, the phrase is only used in that small paragraph, hence it can easily be changed. Any thoughts? Mitral8 ( talk) 11:02, 10 March 2021 (UTC) reply

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 17 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kyliehagarty0, Ppribonic, Ebarke10 ( article contribs). Peer reviewers: Sahil Premalkumar Patel, Billycoolgirl, Garren Barrows.

— Assignment last updated by Wordnerd104 ( talk) 14:25, 10 October 2023 (UTC) reply